The Financial Times (FT) cited four unnamed European officials to report that “European military powers work on 5-10 year plan to replace US in Nato.”
The UK, France, Germany and the Nordic nations are named in the report as wanting to present this proposal to the US during the next NATO Summit in June.
FT also reported that some countries have refused to participate in these talks, either out of fear that this could encourage the US to move faster in this regard or due to their belief that it won’t abandon Europe.
FT is likely referring to Poland, the Baltic States and Romania, the most important countries on NATO’s eastern flank, all of which prefer to remain under the US security umbrella.
Poland’s recent flirtation with France could herald a full-blown pivot if the ruling liberal-globalists win May’s presidential election, but for now, it functions as an attempt to rebalance ties with the US amid uncertainty over its future plans. It can also be seen as a misguided negotiation tactic to keep and expand the US military presence.
As for the Baltic States, they have a diehard pro-American elite and they’ll only realign toward the EU in the event that they’re forced to do so by Trump unilaterally curtailing or even totally removing US troops from their territories as part of a grand deal with Russia.
Meanwhile, Romania notably rebuffed France’s proposal to extend its nuclear umbrella over the rest of the continent, which can be interpreted as placing more faith in the US than in Europe in the scenario of a crisis with Russia over Moldova.
If these five countries continue perceiving their national interests in these ways, which would require Poland’s ruling liberal-globalists not to pivot to France if they win the presidency (their opponents are comparatively more pro-US), then an intra-NATO European rift would emerge.
France and Germany, which are competing amongst themselves and with Poland for leadership of post-conflict Europe, could then find their envisaged influence over Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) challenged by the US.
From Estonia down to Romania and possibly as far as Bulgaria and even Greece, the penultimate of which pivoted to the US long ago against the will of its Russophilic population, while the last needs the US to keep Turkey’s maritime claims at bay, NATO’s eastern flank would fall under US influence.
This so-called “cordon sanitaire” could then serve the dual purpose of retaining US influence in this geostrategic part of Europe as it “pivots (back) to Asia” while also keeping Western Europe and Russia divided.
That scenario could be offset by Poland’s liberals, but barring that, it’s predicated on: 1) the CEE countries continuing to perceive Russia as a threat; 2) them considering the US to be more reliable of a security partner than the EU; and 3) the US not voluntarily ceding all its influence in Europe.
If these variables remain constant, then Western Europe might militarily consolidate largely independent of CEE, which CEE countries might still appreciate since it would bolster their “deterrence” strategies.
After all, if America abandons them in the unlikely scenario of a hot NATO-Russian war that somehow stays below the nuclear threshold, then the CEE countries could rely on a militarily consolidated Western Europe to rush to their rescue if they can’t stop Russia on their own.
That said, Russia has no intention to invade NATO, the US’ continued military influence in CEE could deter provocative actions by those anti-Russian countries, and the US’ reputation would be destroyed if it abandoned them during a hot war.
With this insight in mind, Europe might militarily bifurcate into a strategically autonomous western half and an American-aligned eastern one if FT’s report about the first’s plans to replace the US in NATO is true.
The only factor that could realistically offset that scenario might be the outcome of Poland’s upcoming presidential election, thus drawing attention to its disproportionate influence in shaping Europe’s future security architecture, the subject of which is at the center of NATO-Russian tensions.
This article was first published on Andrew Korybko’s Substack and is republished with kind permission. Become an Andrew Korybko Newsletter subscriber here.
For decades American presidents have asked NATO countries to spend more on defense, and for decades they’ve done the same thing: nod in agreement, then do nothing.
For decades we’ve protected Europe, even risking nuclear war on their behalf.
And all the while, the Europeans have made a national sport of mocking America and all things American.
So guess what? We’re done. You guys pay your own bills, and let’s see how you do. The European NATO members include four of the world’s ten largest economies, and two nuclear-armed nations. Europe can certainly defend itself if it chooses, but it won’t as long as we continue to let them play us for suckers.
Germany had the best European economy and France has usually been anti US. Those two likely will pair up to lead Europe. Germany has enough budget to gear up European military and French politics will lead the way as they never agree with US most of the time. UK is an American puppet. Poland will be helpful
The only thing Germany and France have are bureaucrats (not leaders) who talk alot and do nothing.
Germany’s economy is in freefall and the French have subs that are better in reverse than forward.
UK (like Aus) is a US puppet. Poland – crazy brave.
You not quite updated on the CURRENT Germany under Friederich Merz I see and his or his party’s om-going AND short term future plans and the on-going almost unprecedented political changes they has been to their to the Germany’s historic so-called debt break and it’s military investments, ETC., LED by the current won Kansler-administration???Hmm?…Be updated first,then talk or open that almost one-sided mouth, thanks,my guy..lol..Whatta you know?..🤷♂️🙃
If you could provide a better google translate ? Without Schnapps.
Germany might finally have broken out of it’s fiscal restraints after the Weimar Republic, but for what? A Rhineland confederation?
What is needed is for the Brandenburg (Prussian?) mindset with 1 wary eye on the Eastern Horizon. A Prussian King whose 2nd language is Polish, a leader who knows that scratch a Russ to see a Tatar. Someone who realises Lvov is really Lemburg and that the Drang Nach Osten includes Ukraine.
Some of the EU. Probably all of them, think that the US will come to their rescue. Look at Ukraine. They’re all in denial. Half of Ukraine is a wasteland and any inhabitants there are living like cavemen. Open defecating like Indians.
The only thing Germany and France have are bureaucrats (not leaders) who talk alot and do nothing.
Germany’s economy is in freefall and the French have subs that are better in reverse than forward.
UK (like Aus) is a US puppet.
You not quite updated on the CURRENT Germany under Friederich Merz I see and his or his party’s om-going AND short term future plans and the on-going almost unprecedented political changes they has been to their to the Germany’s historic so-called debt break and it’s military investments, ETC., LED by the current won Kansler-administration???Hmm?…Be updated first,then talk or open that almost one-sided mouth, thanks,my guy..lol..Whatta you know?..🤷♂️🙃
Shengnan Shidai
Nato is America, and America is Nato, without the US, europe is just a bunch of squabbling little states, thinking they’re more than they are.
NATO is the fourth reich and needs to be dismantled. We already see the ugly, hypocritical face of the Globalist, “progressive” wing of the Western establishment overturning democracy in Romania by banning candidates who represent people fed up with NATO using Romania as a pawn. This author needs to stop conflating the Romanian people, who do not want war with Russia, with the Western puppetocracy who do.
The only 4th Reich is China with designs on independent Taiwan. When did Tibet last have an election?
Shengnan Shidai
There we most likely are agreeing on.Yeah;)